From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [RFC] [PATCH v2 2/2] support/kconfig: Bump to kconfig from Linux 4.17-rc2
Date: Sun, 20 May 2018 16:50:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180520165009.56b44d9b@windsurf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180520144141.GB3453@scaer>
Hello,
On Sun, 20 May 2018 16:41:41 +0200, Yann E. MORIN wrote:
> I initially did not reply further to this part, becuase I seem to
> remember that there was a change in behavious with certain versions of
> flex/bison, that made the output change drastically, and I was afraid we
> could be bitten by this...
>
> But in the end, this is not a problem, because we would not care to
> mix-n-match files built with different versions of said tools, as they
> would be those from the distro, always, and never those we ship, since
> we would no longer ship them.
>
> And eventually, I now remember that the issue was with gperf changing
> its API (a function prototype changed), and that was causing pain. But
> now, kconfig no longer uses gperf to start with, so no incompatibility
> anymore anyway.
>
> Which would allow us to drop the dependency of linux on host-{flex,bison}
> that we had to add recently.
If we start relying on the system-installed flex and bison, then we
should remove host-flex and host-bison entirely, not only for the linux
package. The question is whether bison and flex both behave in a
reasonably similar way regardless of which version is used.
When I see that even "tar" does not have a sufficiently stable
behavior (which forces us to build host-tar), I'm a bit worried about
more complex tools such as flex and bison.
Best regards,
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons)
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-20 14:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-09 16:44 [Buildroot] [PATCH v2 1/2] support/kconfig: Add missing target to README.buildroot Petr Vorel
2018-05-09 16:44 ` [Buildroot] [RFC] [PATCH v2 2/2] support/kconfig: Bump to kconfig from Linux 4.17-rc2 Petr Vorel
2018-05-19 21:03 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2018-05-20 5:05 ` Petr Vorel
2018-05-20 14:23 ` Yann E. MORIN
2018-05-20 14:31 ` Petr Vorel
2018-05-20 14:41 ` Yann E. MORIN
2018-05-20 14:50 ` Thomas Petazzoni [this message]
2018-05-22 21:22 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2018-05-28 20:37 ` Yann E. MORIN
2018-05-29 10:44 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2018-05-29 17:04 ` Yann E. MORIN
2018-07-30 13:04 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2018-07-31 7:55 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2018-07-31 8:06 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2018-07-31 8:20 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2018-08-01 19:42 ` Yann E. MORIN
2018-08-01 20:20 ` Yann E. MORIN
2018-08-02 11:02 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2018-08-02 17:10 ` Yann E. MORIN
2018-08-03 16:24 ` Yann E. MORIN
2018-05-09 16:46 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH v2 1/2] support/kconfig: Add missing target to README.buildroot Petr Vorel
2018-05-13 20:09 ` Thomas Petazzoni
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180520165009.56b44d9b@windsurf \
--to=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.